Skip to main content

Research design boundaries for qualitative research, stakeholder and patient and public involvement, and why they matter

Keenan, Julia, Poland, Fiona, Wilson, Patricia M., Mathie, Elspeth, Boote, Jonathan, Varley, Anna, Wythe, Helena, Wellings, Amander, Vicary, Penny, Cowe, Marion, and others. (2017) Research design boundaries for qualitative research, stakeholder and patient and public involvement, and why they matter. In: BMJ Open. Theorising and Reflecting on Collaboration. 7 (Supp 2). BMJ (doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016492.40) (KAR id:60950)

Microsoft PowerPoint Other
Language: English
Download (327kB)
[img]
Official URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016492.40

Abstract

Within current mainstream understandings of patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research, a clear distinction is made between what ‘involvement’ in research is: ‘research being carried out ‘with’ or ‘by’ members of the public rather than ‘to’, ‘about’ or ‘for’ them'1 and what it is not: namely ‘engagement with’ and ‘participation in’ research. Research evidence describes problems than can arise when such distinctions are unclear or misunderstood (often by those new or unfamiliar with PPI); or when distinctions are intentionally blurred e.g. by ‘dual roles’ being created within some projects, where research participants also advise on the conduct of projects. What is less widely examined, however, is the blurring of boundaries between the object of enquiry which is the business of PPI for that project, the data which is the object of qualitative collection involving discussion with participants and the purposeful research activities which are best progressed through engagement with stakeholders. This poster draws upon case study findings from two recent, similar National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-funded evaluations of PPI in health research: RAPPORT (England-wide) and IMPRESS (regional research programme-specific), pertaining to how researchers (from various disciplines, using various research designs) within different case study research projects can blur the boundaries between qualitative research, stakeholder events and PPI. We pose questions pertaining to the consequences of blurred research design boundaries for the success of outcomes of public-research collaborations. We query why, and to what extent, such distinctions matter in co-producing knowledge and in measuring the impact of various investments in collaborative research activities.

Item Type: Conference or workshop item (Poster)
DOI/Identification number: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016492.40
Subjects: H Social Sciences
H Social Sciences > HM Sociology
Divisions: Faculties > Social Sciences > School of Social Policy Sociology and Social Research > Centre for Health Services Studies
Depositing User: Patricia Wilson
Date Deposited: 24 Mar 2017 16:31 UTC
Last Modified: 06 May 2020 03:15 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/60950 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Wilson, Patricia M.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5787-9736
  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year